Suppr超能文献

三焦点人工晶状体(AT LISA,Eyecryl SERT trifocal)与扩展景深人工晶状体(Eyhance,Eyecryl SERT EDOF)的临床效果比较。

Comparison of clinical outcomes of trifocal intraocular lens (AT LISA, Eyecryl SERT trifocal) versus extended depth of focus intraocular lens (Eyhance, Eyecryl SERT EDOF).

机构信息

Uma Eye Clinic, Department of Ophthalmology, Chennai, India.

出版信息

Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022 Aug;70(8):2867-2871. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_2921_21.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare four different types of intra ocular lenses (IOLs), namely, AT LISA, Eyecryl SERT trifocal, Eyhance, Eyecryl SERT extended depth of focus (EDOF) with respect to their clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective comparative study in which patients who underwent surgery and one of the four types of IOL were implanted. Postoperative evaluation was recorded at one month, postoperatively. The monocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (6 m), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) (60 cm), distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (CIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) (40 cm), and corrected near visual acuity (CNVA) were assessed postoperatively on post operative day 30, for all four IOL groups. Defocus curve and contrast sensitivity were also compared.

RESULTS

With regards to UDVA and CDVA, P value was not statistically significant. (P = 0.534 and 0.421, respectively). EDOF group of IOLs had statistically significant better UIVA and CIVA than trifocal IOL group. (P < 0.001, 0.012, <0.001) and EDOF group had statistically significant worse P value pertaining to UNVA and CNVA (P < 0.001, 0.070, <0.001, 0.190). Pertaining to contrast sensitivity, EDOF group had better contrast sensitivity than Trifocal IOL group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

All four IOLs compared in this study had good comparable distant visual acuity. Near visual acuity was better with AT LISA and Eyecryl SERT trifocal IOL while intermediate vision was better with Eyhance and Eyecryl SERT EDOF IOL. Contrast sensitivity was better in EDOF IOLs than in both trifocal IOLs.

摘要

目的

比较四种不同类型的人工晶状体(IOL),即 AT LISA、Eyecryl SERT 三焦点、Eyhance、Eyecryl SERT 扩展景深(EDOF),评估它们的临床效果。

方法

这是一项回顾性对比研究,纳入接受手术并植入这四种类型之一的 IOL 的患者。术后一个月进行单眼未矫正远视力(UDVA)和矫正远视力(CDVA)(6 米)、未矫正中间视力(UIVA)(60 厘米)、距离矫正中间视力(CIVA)、未矫正近视力(UNVA)(40 厘米)和矫正近视力(CNVA)评估。术后 30 天评估所有四组 IOL 的远视力、近视力、中间视力和对比敏感度。

结果

UDVA 和 CDVA 方面,P 值无统计学意义(分别为 0.534 和 0.421)。EDOF IOL 组 UIVA 和 CIVA 明显优于三焦点 IOL 组(P<0.001,0.012,<0.001),而 EDOF 组 UNVA 和 CNVA 较差(P<0.001,0.070,<0.001,0.190)。EDOF 组对比敏感度优于三焦点 IOL 组(P<0.001)。

结论

本研究比较的四种 IOL 均具有良好的远视力。AT LISA 和 Eyecryl SERT 三焦点 IOL 近视力较好,Eyhance 和 Eyecryl SERT EDOF IOL 中间视力较好。EDOF IOL 的对比敏感度优于两种三焦点 IOL。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0797/9672785/7be369c18f22/IJO-70-2867-g001.jpg

相似文献

2
Extended Depth of Focus Versus Trifocal for Intraocular Lens Implantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Am J Ophthalmol. 2023 Jul;251:52-70. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2023.01.024. Epub 2023 Feb 1.
3
Comparison of visual outcomes after two types of mix-and-match implanted trifocal extended-depth-of-focus and trifocal intraocular lenses.
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022 Oct;260(10):3275-3283. doi: 10.1007/s00417-022-05710-w. Epub 2022 May 28.
4
7
Comparison of an aspheric monofocal intraocular lens with the new generation monofocal lens using defocus curve.
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2020 Dec;68(12):3025-3029. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_985_20.
8
Comparisons of visual outcomes between bilateral implantation and mix-and-match implantation of three types intraocular lenses.
Int Ophthalmol. 2023 Apr;43(4):1143-1152. doi: 10.1007/s10792-022-02513-0. Epub 2022 Sep 20.
9
Trifocal versus extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses after cataract extraction.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jul 10;7(7):CD014891. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014891.pub2.
10
Visual outcomes of non-diffractive extended-depth-of-focus and enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses: A case-control study.
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2023 Jan;33(1):262-268. doi: 10.1177/11206721221125004. Epub 2022 Sep 4.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of clinical outcomes of phacoemulsification with implantation of two new aspheric intraocular lenses: Real-world data.
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2025 Jun 1;73(Suppl 3):S418-S423. doi: 10.4103/IJO.IJO_2395_24. Epub 2025 Apr 17.
3
Comparative Analysis of Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of a New Enhanced Monofocal IOL and a Conventional Monofocal IOL.
Clin Ophthalmol. 2024 May 1;18:1157-1169. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S456332. eCollection 2024.
4
Systematic bibliometric analysis of research hotspots and trends on the application of premium IOLs in the past 2 decades.
Int J Ophthalmol. 2024 Apr 18;17(4):736-747. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2024.04.19. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

4
Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies.
Prog Retin Eye Res. 2019 Jan;68:124-143. doi: 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2018.09.004. Epub 2018 Sep 19.
7
Comparative analysis of visual outcomes with 4 intraocular lenses: Monofocal, multifocal, and extended range of vision.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2018 Feb;44(2):156-167. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.11.011.
8
Multifocal intraocular lenses: Types, outcomes, complications and how to solve them.
Taiwan J Ophthalmol. 2017 Oct-Dec;7(4):179-184. doi: 10.4103/tjo.tjo_19_17.
9
A comparative study of the visual outcomes between a new trifocal and an extended depth of focus intraocular lens.
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2018 Mar;28(2):182-187. doi: 10.5301/ejo.5001029. Epub 2017 Aug 9.
10
Multifocal intraocular lenses: An overview.
Surv Ophthalmol. 2017 Sep-Oct;62(5):611-634. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2017.03.005. Epub 2017 Mar 31.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验